Whether the district court erred in dismissing petitioner's claims for lack of standing and failure to exhaust administrative remedies

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . \) Vat }We spender WI we a \evew » re Wisiniek Cooet “Sao ond Od ev \yot Lespondens ws ‘wren Yo a Nosh shot SCS Nhe Gosek ond HRendoanms aaree Ne R&R Won owt \avo\ — \ao\ by Vag hae She ord merceee ye Pope ssa The Count Snd Do opdaws are ad When \aee on vied Yo hoace Lerpandent ae \ ray ors Seen CLasgarders Ama. As Swi. i OAR Wyre Cover vdioied Yo do sa XOXNS eo and dead WOK YH 2) Respondent X\\ owed o\\ at Wed od. Shot's QAson Rales ce an din ephavsyion & odminish<iue Leameadies and Ane Wooo ds. ) Cover si\ dis missed Vadis \ors sowt ») Woes * Vesgorbech att ‘hy os ON emravsion \nearin \ n Ne Sees’ Shove os odoanianoine Regedies ere Wot Cra oabie 2] wma °? | ) Should ae Aisssic\ coved ony Ve oosrany. Lock, Gt OS. Alle gale So an VYamale No. Provides an odour “0 Qoesh ond Yresandea, Comdinve t sok Seas Yoav Vue dae \Ris Ob\echions Were BY ven Ve | bese Ordthoaies Yee westhgg —e